Opinion
3S
an
The Battalion
Wo more than four
University of Georgia punishes students who stay too long
R:
JENELLE WILSON
ISTAN
J
F-
ecently, the University of
Georgia announced tenta
tive plans to persuade-its
students to graduate faster. Instead
[of developing more effective ways
[to encourage students to graduate
[on time, the university is planning
Ion punishing those students who attend more than four years.
In doing so, university officials will fail*to address the more
probable reasons students may not be able to graduate in four
years.
University of Georgia officials feel because the atmosphere
around their college is so appealing, students do not want to
leave. The students take an average of 13 credit hours a semes
ter and spend an additional six hours studying. Administrators
[must assume that students spend the rest of their time partying.
In an attempt to embarrass students who attend more than
.Jfour years, the university plans to change its student classifica-
n™ tions from the more traditional freshman through
I
0
<Tat;
5 ress. ES?
AfgharJ
)es bomJ
dghanisE-
4
Permits
escame;
villager-■
iing an;
and ir.
indderi
ntagom
eked a 1
but sued
/ havec
senior system to how many years the stu
dents have been attending college.
| Students who are “fifth-years” or
above will be put last in
line for privileges
such as parking
permits and
-evince,
villagt
miles so-
were
■ during
non inn
U.S- p!*)
ut 40 pe-
d, leads'
in disfillH
^sualty■ a ngeuque ford • the battalion
ghans "
tcent po f
sports passes.
University of Georgia students, however, are more success
ful at graduating on time than many other college students in
the United States. According to CNN.com, the average time for
University of Georgia students to graduate is 4.3 years, an
entire year under the national average of 5.3 years.
The University of Georgia
Fact Book shows that approx
imately 35 percent of all
freshman that started their
postsecondary degree at the
university graduate within
four years; the percentage
increases to almost 60
percent at five
years. The numbers
seem low, but once national
averages and retention rates are taken
into account, the numbers are actually bet
ter than many other universities.
An ACT study has shown that just 41.9 per
cent of public college students graduate within
five years, almost 20 percent lower than the
University of Georgia.
The percentage of students who graduate
within five years continues to drop nation
wide for many reasons; partying is not
one °f them. Some students are not pre
pared for college and spend their first
year taking remedial classes. Students
also take a longer time to decide on a
major, lengthening the amount of time
they spend in college.
According to ACT director Wes Habley,
finances are a major reason for a prolonged
graduation time.
Students who
have to work
part-time to
support them-
^ selves reduce
‘ f the amount of
hours they take a
semester. For some
students, especially
♦ those not as academi
cally prepared as others,
it is impossible to work
part-time and take 17 credit
hours per semester.
University officials said the
new plans are an attempt to make
room for incoming freshman, but get
ting rid of a few “sixth-years” will not
make enough room. There are simply
not enough “sixth-years” to get rid of.
The same ACT study shows only 74.2 per
cent of freshman return for their second year.
Students continue to drop out of college after their
sophomore and junior years. The 60 percent of
University of Georgia students that graduate within five
years represents the vast majority of students who have
stayed in college.
Embarrassing students in an attempt to get them to gradu
ate faster not only fails to address the real problems behind
longer graduation times, it is also mean-spirited. The
University of Georgia, which is doing better than most other
public colleges in America, should not be punishing the stu
dents that are taking slightly longer to graduate. Trying to
encourage earlier graduation without taking privileges away
from students would be much more effective.
Jenelle Wilso?i is a junior
political science major.
n city
lany ot
Afghans s
it 2 a-itt- 1
’0 tlOUfi
lar M ;
,id helti ;
^ople
Speedy Gonzales returns to 1
Cartoon mouse wins battle against political corrects
A s a result of increased demand from Speedy ■Sir* li Gonzales displays a lot
/ m _ ... . • ..n m t^sT harn-wnrk ina i
said nt os
jured "
One o:
girl ntf
to the ^
party*
nbers ot
hild, I'M
ier ni pi
id a ■' i '
hbors
spital-
hildren*]
io ha' e
nined V
5 are
t these d
no P ari ;
heir p ar ‘
sip
itago n
on a
ve coif
event ■
, the rep
,-y fire- 1
led a f t
aid-
A s a result of increased demand from Speedy
Gonzales fans, the fastest mouse in all ot
Mexico has been resunected after having
| been placed on hiatus as a result of the Cartoon
I Network’s owner’s belief that the popular cartoon
I perpetuated negative Mexican stereotypes. It
appears that Speedy has not only outwitted
Sylvester the Cat, but managed to defeat one ot today s most foi-
midable nuisances, political correctness. In a time ol perpetual
euphemistic behavior, especially surrounding race issues, it is
refreshing to see cartoon viewers have not traded in theii endear
ing sense of humor for the obligatory hypersensitive political skin
that many Americans wear proudly.
According to Hispanic Online, problems suuounding the
Speedy Gonzales cartoons include references to laziness, drink
ing, drug use and womanizing. However, these themes are not
unfamiliar to the cartoon world of Speedy s time. Take toi
example, Warner Brothers ethnic character, Pepe LePew, the
suave, French womanizing skunk. Is Warner Brothers concerned
this cartoon perpetuates an image of all Frenchmen being obses
sive, stalking sexual predators? Given the extreme need for po iti-
cal correctness that exists in our society, it can be assuied the
matter was at least discussed but probably tabled because epe
LePew does not belong to an ethnic minority.
Ironically, the cartoon, which contains the likes ot Slowpo e
Rodriguez, Speedy’s perpetually slow cousin, has a stiong an
base of Hispanic viewers. In fact, according to Fox News, c uiing
the cartoon's hiatus from American television, one ot the tew
Places the cartoon still ran was on the Cartoon Network Latin
America, where Speedy was hugely popular.
In addition to simply being an entertaining cartoon, Speedy
JENNIFER LOZANO
Gonzales displays a lot of honorable traits. Speedy
is a fast, hard-working, clever Mexican mouse, quite
the opposite of the typical negative Mexican stereo
type. Speedy is always looking out for the enemy
“gatos,” and is always willing to drag home his fel
low mouse friends when they are inebriated. In
fact, according to Hispanic Online, there are many
like Adrian Villegas, a Mexican-American comedian, who feel
Speedy was ahead of his time and, for years, the sole positive
Latino character in cartoons.
At this moment in history, it seems that our detonate buttons
that set off anger and offense have been wired incredibly wrong
and, as a result, our lives are oftentimes in disarray over benign
occurrences. Much turmoil has been created in recent years over
things such as simple as a sombrero-wearing cartoon character
with an exaggerated ethnic accent or the lyrics of pop music.
Ironically, we are more forgiving when real role models,
especially leaders of our nation, engage in activities of decep
tion, slander and immorality. Although a parent can tell their
child that Speedy Gonzales is not a real mouse and not all
Mexican-Americans speak with his accent, it is a little more dif
ficult to keep kids from hearing about what the former President
of the United States was in trouble for or various other political
scandals. Therefore, Americans should celebrate the rebirth of
Speedy as a small step in the cartoon world but, hopefully, a
giant leap in favor of logical thinking over hypersensitive politi
cal correctness.
Jennifer Lozano is a senior
English major.
Page 5 • Tuesday, July 2,
Death penalty is
unconstitutional
T he judicial system is finally
beginning to recognize the
Constitutional flaws inher
ent in today’s capital punishment
system. In his Monday ruling.
New York Federal Judge Jed S.
Rakoff became the first to declare
the current federal death penalty unconstitutional in light of
the frequency of mistakes. Hopefully, Rakoff’s ruling will be
the beginning of the end for the current capital punishment^
system in this country.
The decision came in the case of two New York men, Alan
Quinones and Diego Rodriguez, who are facing a trial in con
nection with a drug-related killing in the Bronx three years
ago. Their attorneys argued in pretrial motions that the death
penalty was unconstitutional following statements by prosecu
tion they would seek the death penalty. In his preliminary rul
ing in April, Rakoff told both prosecution and defense he
intended to rule the death penalty unconstitutional unless the
prosecution could convince him otherwise.
In his 28-page opinion, Rakoff cited evidence that innocent
people are sentenced to the death penalty with greater fre
quency than previously thought. Through DNA technology,
which had not previously been available, investigators have
discovered the innocence of individuals nationwide who were
on death row for crimes they did not commit. Other capital
punishment researchers have examined evidence from past
cases and discovered evidence supporting the innocence of
more convicts who had already been executed.
In his ruling, Rakoff said that since 1993, at least 12 death
row inmates have been exonerated through DNA testing. In
each case, the inmates had been convicted unanimously by a
jury and had the ruling affirmed by an appeals court. This evi
dence, Rakoff said, showed the fallibility of the current capi
tal punishment system.
As a result of such evidence, Rakoff said “implementation
of the Federal Death Penalty Act not only deprives innocent
people of a significant opportunity to prove their innocence,
and thereby violates procedural due process, but also creates
an undue risk of executing innocent people, and thereby vio
lates substantive due process.”
The prosecution tried to convince Rakoff that the studies
he cited in his preliminary ruling had “serious methodological
flaws,” which resulted in 42 criminologists, sociologists and
psychologists submitting briefs attacking the prosecution’s
position.
Rakoff was correct in his ruling. DNA evidence has pro
vided investigators with not just a new tool in investigating
crimes, but a new way with which to examine the cases of the
past and learn whether the proper individuals have been pun
ished for their crimes. So far, this new perspective has shown
that the judicial system has failed to prosecute the guilty
party far too often for comfort.
In capital punishment cases, it is vital that the proper indi
vidual be prosecuted. When the punishment is irrevocable,
and to make a mistake means to steal an innocent life, the
government must have a better history of success. The fail
ures simply come at too great a cost.
Some have argued that with DNA testing now available,
the number of mistakes will decrease. This thinking fails to
recognize the lesson learned through applying DNA testing to
previous cases — that the judicial system is simply too
flawed for the government to be certain the individuals they
are executing are guilty.
The murder of innocent people by the federal government
must be avoided, and the risk has been proven in numerous
studies to be higher than anyone would like. States such as
Illinois have already suspended executions until more infor
mation can be obtained regarding the number of innocents
executed, as well as the greater rate of minority executions
compared to whites. With issues like these plaguing
America’s capital punishment system, the death penalty vio
lates the Constitution. Until the weaknesses in the system can
be addressed, executions should be halted throughout the
nation.
Richard Bray is a senior
journalism major.
RICHARD BRAY
MAIL CALL
Flag mistreated
The American flag symbolizes
the United States of America. An
obvious statement, but charged
with deeper meaning. How citi
zens interact with this symbol
simultaneously reflects one’s
attitude about the nation, and
makes a statement regarding
one’s character. For example, to
salute the flag is to display
respect and approval for some
aspect of the United States
while making one’s patriotic
leanings apparent to all
observers. In contrast, to burn
the flag vividly portrays an indi
vidual’s disapproval for some
American policy, meanwhile
labeling that person as an
activist of some sort. It is this
strong symbolic component of
the flag which makes all interac
tion filled with meaning.
In addition to forcing
Americans to rethink our foreign
policy, the events which
occurred on Sept. 11 have
placed the American people
under close scrutiny from the
world at large. How will
Americans deal with a direct
assault from outside? Is free
dom really more important than
comfort to the average
American citizen? Has America
become soft? These are the
questions being asked.
Last Friday, as I passed the
Academic building I noticed two
individuals taking the flag down
for the evening. Once they low
ered this symbol for the most
powerful nation on the face of
the Earth, they proceeded to
wad it up like a soiled bedsheet
and carried it inside. Today,
when walking between the stat
ue of Sul Ross and the Silver
Taps Memorial, I noticed the flag
still flying drenched,having been
subjugated to two hours of rain.
What statement does this
make to those outside our
University considering that the
flag represents our nation? Is
this supposed to illustrate our
ignorance or laziness to those
outside of Texas A&M
University?
Jacob Morris
Class of 2001